—
Karnataka High Court
Smt Fahmeeda Begum W/O Shabbir Ahmed … vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 April, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102228 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. FEHMEEDA BEGUM
W/O. SHABBIR AHMED INAMDAR,
AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. BC NO.137, OPPOSITE BSNL OFFICE,
CAMP, BELGAVI-590001.
2. ABDUL KHADAR
S/O. GAUSMOHIDDIN GALFIYA @ SOUDAGAR,
AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. HOUSE NO.340,
MUJAWAR GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH WOMEN POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI CITY,
KHADEBAZAR SUB-DIVISION, TQ. BELAGAVI,
DIST. BELGAVI-590001, THROUGH ITS STATION
VIJAYALAKSHMI
HOUSE OFICER, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
M KANKUPPI
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580001.
Digitally signed by
VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI
Location: HIGH COURT OF
KARNATAKA DHARWAD
BENCH
Date: 2024.04.02 16:13:35
+0530 2. SMT. SEEMA W/O MUHAMMED ASIF INAMDAR,
AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. H.NO.55/4, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
SHIVAJI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001.
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. DATTATRAYA J. NIAK, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED U/SEC 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY
THE RESPONDENTS AGAINST THESE PETITIONERS /ACCUSED NO.2
AND 3 CRIME NO.59/2023 OF WOMEN POLICE STATION,
KHADEBAZAR SUB-DIVISION BELAGAVI CITY FOR THE COMMISSION
ALLEGED O/P/U/SEC. 498A, 323, 377, 504 READ WITH SECTION 34
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 ON THE FILE OF THE JMFC-II
COURT, BELAGAVI IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE
CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petition is filed by petitioners -accused Nos.2 and
3 praying to quash the proceedings in Crime No.59/2023
of Belagavi City Women Police Station registered for
offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 504
read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code(hereinafter
referred as ‘IPC’ for brevity).
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and
learned AGA for respondent No.1-State. None appears for
respondent No.2.
3. Respondent No.2 has filed first information and
on that basis a case came to be registered in Belagavi City
Women Police Station in Crime No.59/2023 for offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 504 read with
Section 34 of IPC against these petitioners and accused
No.1 husband of respondent No.2. Petitioners -accused
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
Nos.2 and 3 have sought for quashing of the said
proceedings in Crime No.59/2023.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners would contend
that the accusation against petitioner No.2 -accused No.3
is that he and his wife induced respondent No.2 to marry
the accused No.1 by impressing upon her that he is man
with good character, moral and ethics. He contends that
except this allegation there is no any other allegation
against petitioner No.2 -accused No.3. The said allegation
does not attract any offences alleged against petitioner
No.2. He further contends that the accusation against
petitioner No.1 -accused No.2 is that she is sister of the
husband of the respondent No.2 and he doubled up his
illegal acts at her instigation and started demanding
money for settlement with his first wife. He contends that
even the said averment does not attract any offence and it
is abuse of process of law against the petitioners. With
this, he prayed to quash the proceedings in Crime
No.59/2023 of Belagavi City Women Police Station.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
5. Learned AGA would contend that there are
averments in the complaint against the petitioner No.2 –
accused No.3 that he made false representation about the
accused No.1 to respondent No.2 to marry accused No.1.
He contends that the petitioner No.1-accused No.2 has
abated the accused No.1 i.e. her brother and in
furtherance of the said instigation accused No.1 started
demanding money from respondent No.2. He submits that
there are no grounds for quashing the proceedings. With
this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has
perused the charge sheet records.
7. The accusation against petitioner No.2 -accused
No.3 made in the complaint reads thus
“The accused No.3 arrayed herein Abdul Kadar Gous
Mohiddin Soudagar along with his wife induced me to
marry Muhammed Asif M. Inamdar by impressing upon
me that he is a man with a good moral, character and
ethics.”
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
On reading the said averment in the complaint
indicate that petitioner No.2 -accused No.3 made a
representation to respondent No.2 that accused No.1 is a
good person and induced her to marry him. The said
averment does not attract any of the offences for which
the case is registered against petitioner No.2 -accused
No.3. Merely because stating as good person at
matrimonial alliance does not amount to any offences.
There is famous saying/proverb in Kannada that “¸Á«gÀ
¸ÀļÀÄî ºÉý MAzÀÄ ªÀÄzÀÄªÉ ªÀiÁqÀÄ”, it means in marriage
alliance if any untrue statement is made it is fair in
matrimonial alliance. More so respondent No.2 had
received matrimonial alliances of accused No.1 through
Shaadi.com where he himself stated in his bio-data that he
is divorcee and he was working as Superintendent in
Central GST, Belagavi. If respondent No.2 found that said
content of the bio data is false, she cannot accused the
others who said good about accused No.1.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
8. The accusation against petitioner No.1 -accused
No.2 in the complaint reads thus
“My husband under the thumb of his sister Fahmida
Begum Inamdar doubled up his illegal acts. In the month
of May 2023 my husband at instigation of his sister
started demanding Rs.10,00,000/- from her by saying
that the said money is required to have settlement with
his first wife Tabassum.”
The said averment does not attract any of the
offences for which crime is registered i.e. offence
punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 504 read with
Section 34 of IPC.
9. In view of the above, proceedings against
petitioners are requires to be quashed.
In the result, the following
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed.
ii) The proceedings in Crime No.59/2023 of
Belagavi City Women Police Station registered
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5955
CRL.P No. 102228 of 2023
for offences punishable under Sections 498A,
323, 377, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC are
quashed so far as petitioners -accused Nos.2
and 3 are concerned.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DSP
CT:BCK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
